Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
14 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1967–1980 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Parks v. Miller Printing MacHine Co.green2 sentences1974Pa rks v. Miller Printing Machine Co., 336 Pa. 455, 459 , 9 A. 2d 742, 744 (1939). 1974Pa rks v. Miller Printing Machine Co., 336 Pa. 455, 459 , 9 A. 2d 742, 744 (1939). | 1 | 2 |
A. P. Green Refractories Co. v. Luckeygreen2 sentences1980The unusual pathological result doctrine “ ‘holds that where an employee sustains an injury to some part of his body not previously injured or diseased, resulting in a break of the bony structure or a tear in the soft tissue of the body, while doing his usual duties in the usual way, then the injury is compensable because the accident resides in the extraordinary nature of the effect rather than in the-cause.’ ” Page’s Department Store v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, 11 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 126, 130 , 309 A.2d 169, 171 (1973) (emphasis omitted) (quoting A. P. Refractories Co. v. Luckey 1980The unusual pathological result doctrine “ ‘holds that where an employee sustains an injury to some part of his body not previously injured or diseased, resulting in a break of the bony structure or a tear in the soft tissue of the body, while doing his usual duties in the usual way, then the injury is compensable because the accident resides in the extraordinary nature of the effect rather than in the-cause.’ ” Page’s Department Store v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, 11 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 126, 130 , 309 A.2d 169, 171 (1973) (emphasis omitted) (quoting A. P. Refractories Co. v. Luckey | 1 | 1 |
Page's Department Store v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Boardgreen2 sentences1980The unusual pathological result doctrine “ ‘holds that where an employee sustains an injury to some part of his body not previously injured or diseased, resulting in a break of the bony structure or a tear in the soft tissue of the body, while doing his usual duties in the usual way, then the injury is compensable because the accident resides in the extraordinary nature of the effect rather than in the-cause.’ ” Page’s Department Store v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, 11 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 126, 130 , 309 A.2d 169, 171 (1973) (emphasis omitted) (quoting A. P. Refractories Co. v. Luckey 1980The unusual pathological result doctrine “ ‘holds that where an employee sustains an injury to some part of his body not previously injured or diseased, resulting in a break of the bony structure or a tear in the soft tissue of the body, while doing his usual duties in the usual way, then the injury is compensable because the accident resides in the extraordinary nature of the effect rather than in the-cause.’ ” Page’s Department Store v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, 11 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 126, 130 , 309 A.2d 169, 171 (1973) (emphasis omitted) (quoting A. P. Refractories Co. v. Luckey | 1 | 1 |
Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board v. Hamiltongreen2 sentences1976Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board v. Hamilton, 21 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 425, 428 , 346 A. 2d 387, 389 (1975). 1976Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board v. Hamilton, 21 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 425, 428 , 346 A. 2d 387, 389 (1975). | 1 | 1 |
United States Steel Corp. v. Simongreen2 sentences1975See United States Steel Corporation v. Simon, 9 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 281 , 305 A.2d 913 (1973). 1975See United States Steel Corporation v. Simon, 9 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 281 , 305 A.2d 913 (1973). | 1 | 1 |
McGowan v. Upper Darby Pet Supplygreen2 sentences1971See also McGowan v. Upper Darby Pet Supply, 207 Pa. Superior Ct. 329 , 217 A. 2d 846 (1966), Lingle v. Lingle Coal Co., 203 Pa. Superior Ct. 464 , 201 A. 2d 279 (1964). 1971See also McGowan v. Upper Darby Pet Supply, 207 Pa. Superior Ct. 329 , 217 A. 2d 846 (1966), Lingle v. Lingle Coal Co., 203 Pa. Superior Ct. 464 , 201 A. 2d 279 (1964). | 1 | 1 |
Lingle v. Lingle Coal Co.green2 sentences1971See also McGowan v. Upper Darby Pet Supply, 207 Pa. Superior Ct. 329 , 217 A. 2d 846 (1966), Lingle v. Lingle Coal Co., 203 Pa. Superior Ct. 464 , 201 A. 2d 279 (1964). 1971See also McGowan v. Upper Darby Pet Supply, 207 Pa. Superior Ct. 329 , 217 A. 2d 846 (1966), Lingle v. Lingle Coal Co., 203 Pa. Superior Ct. 464 , 201 A. 2d 279 (1964). | 1 | 1 |
Barr v. Atlantic Elevator Companygreen2 sentences1967See footnote 1 and Barr v. Atlantic Elevator Co., 124 Pa. Superior Ct. 57 , 187 A. 815 *460 (1936). 1967See footnote 1 and Barr v. Atlantic Elevator Co., 124 Pa. Superior Ct. 57 , 187 A. 815 *460 (1936). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Yuhas v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.
green
2 sentences1973Ne mitz v. Air Service Int’l., 7 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 373 , 298 A. 2d 654 (1972), and (2) the most recent decisions on the unusual pathological result doctrine indicate that a more liberal construction should be afforded to the definition of an “accident.” Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Yuhas, 8 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 302, 303 A. 2d 266 (1973). 1973Ne mitz v. Air Service Int’l., 7 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 373 , 298 A. 2d 654 (1972), and (2) the most recent decisions on the unusual pathological result doctrine indicate that a more liberal construction should be afforded to the definition of an “accident.” Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Yuhas, 8 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 302, 303 A. 2d 266 (1973). | 2 | 1973–1974 |
Scannella v. Salerno Importing Co.
green
2 sentences1979Accordingly, whether we consider McPhillips’ death under the unusual strain doctrine, Workmen’s Com pensation Appeal Board v. United Sheet Metal Co., 18 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 535 , 336 A.2d 896 (1975), or under the unusual pathological result doctrine, Scanella v. Salerno Importing Co., 2 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 11 , 275 A.2d 907 (1971), the Claimant here has failed to meet her burden of proving by unequivocal medical evidence that McPhillips’ death was causally related to the increase of the burdens of his employment over the year previous to his death. 1979Accordingly, whether we consider McPhillips’ death under the unusual strain doctrine, Workmen’s Com pensation Appeal Board v. United Sheet Metal Co., 18 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 535 , 336 A.2d 896 (1975), or under the unusual pathological result doctrine, Scanella v. Salerno Importing Co., 2 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 11 , 275 A.2d 907 (1971), the Claimant here has failed to meet her burden of proving by unequivocal medical evidence that McPhillips’ death was causally related to the increase of the burdens of his employment over the year previous to his death. | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board v. United Sheet Metal Co.
neutral
2 sentences1979Accordingly, whether we consider McPhillips’ death under the unusual strain doctrine, Workmen’s Com pensation Appeal Board v. United Sheet Metal Co., 18 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 535 , 336 A.2d 896 (1975), or under the unusual pathological result doctrine, Scanella v. Salerno Importing Co., 2 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 11 , 275 A.2d 907 (1971), the Claimant here has failed to meet her burden of proving by unequivocal medical evidence that McPhillips’ death was causally related to the increase of the burdens of his employment over the year previous to his death. 1979Accordingly, whether we consider McPhillips’ death under the unusual strain doctrine, Workmen’s Com pensation Appeal Board v. United Sheet Metal Co., 18 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 535 , 336 A.2d 896 (1975), or under the unusual pathological result doctrine, Scanella v. Salerno Importing Co., 2 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 11 , 275 A.2d 907 (1971), the Claimant here has failed to meet her burden of proving by unequivocal medical evidence that McPhillips’ death was causally related to the increase of the burdens of his employment over the year previous to his death. | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Ricciardi v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences1978Under the unusual pathological result doctrine, an injury is compensable under the Act as an “accident” when, during the course of the employee performing his usual work, an event or series of events causes a sudden onset of a physical injury or harm to the bone or bodily tissues. 2 Ricciardi v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, 34 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 316, 383 A.2d 571 (1978). 1978Under the unusual pathological result doctrine, an injury is compensable under the Act as an “accident” when, during the course of the employee performing his usual work, an event or series of events causes a sudden onset of a physical injury or harm to the bone or bodily tissues. 2 Ricciardi v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, 34 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 316, 383 A.2d 571 (1978). | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Hinkle v. HJ Heinz Company
green
2 sentences1975Heinz Co., 7 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 216 , 298 A. 2d 632 (1972) supports the conclusions of the referee since, in Hinkle , we held that normal expected results are not compensable under the unusual pathological result doctrine. 1975Heinz Co., 7 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 216 , 298 A. 2d 632 (1972) supports the conclusions of the referee since, in Hinkle , we held that normal expected results are not compensable under the unusual pathological result doctrine. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
New Standard Corp. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board
green
2 sentences1974Moreover, even if there was no preexisting condition, we would doubt that the claimant’s heart condition here could be attributed to an accident under this doctrine, for there was no evidence introduced of a physical injury or physical change, which is a prerequisite to application of the unusual pathological result doctrine. 9 New Standard Corporation v. Work men’s Compensation Appeal Board and Miller, 9 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 494 , 309 A. 2d 60 (1973). 1974Moreover, even if there was no preexisting condition, we would doubt that the claimant’s heart condition here could be attributed to an accident under this doctrine, for there was no evidence introduced of a physical injury or physical change, which is a prerequisite to application of the unusual pathological result doctrine. 9 New Standard Corporation v. Work men’s Compensation Appeal Board and Miller, 9 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 494 , 309 A. 2d 60 (1973). | 1 | 1974–1974 |
Gasparovich v. Federal Reserve Bank
green
2 sentences1973The court pointed to the record wherein Yuhas stated he had “never had pain and no back trouble ever” and the finding by the referee that the removal of the steel bar would have “required a good deal of exertion to release it.” These items, together with Dr. Casale’s statement that spondylolysis may remain asymptomatic “until brought to light by some heavy exertion, accident, or trauma,” and the court’s reliance upon Gasparovich v. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, 194 Pa. Superior Ct. 137 , 166 A. 2d 57 (1961), were the bases of the court’s conclusion that the Board had erred as a matter of 1973The court pointed to the record wherein Yuhas stated he had “never had pain and no back trouble ever” and the finding by the referee that the removal of the steel bar would have “required a good deal of exertion to release it.” These items, together with Dr. Casale’s statement that spondylolysis may remain asymptomatic “until brought to light by some heavy exertion, accident, or trauma,” and the court’s reliance upon Gasparovich v. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, 194 Pa. Superior Ct. 137 , 166 A. 2d 57 (1961), were the bases of the court’s conclusion that the Board had erred as a matter of | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Nemitz v. Air Services International
green
2 sentences1973Ne mitz v. Air Service Int’l., 7 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 373 , 298 A. 2d 654 (1972), and (2) the most recent decisions on the unusual pathological result doctrine indicate that a more liberal construction should be afforded to the definition of an “accident.” Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Yuhas, 8 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 302, 303 A. 2d 266 (1973). 1973Ne mitz v. Air Service Int’l., 7 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 373 , 298 A. 2d 654 (1972), and (2) the most recent decisions on the unusual pathological result doctrine indicate that a more liberal construction should be afforded to the definition of an “accident.” Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Yuhas, 8 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 302, 303 A. 2d 266 (1973). | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Hamilton v. Procon, Inc.
green
2 sentences1971The unusual pathological result test Is stated in Hamilton v. Procon, Inc., supra, 434 Pa. at 94 , footnote 2. 1971Mr. Justice COHEN did not participate. [4] The opinion of Mr. Justice JONES did, however, urge the legislature to undertake a study, not deemed feasible for a court to attempt, of the desirability of a revision in light of the latest medical knowledge. 434 Pa. at 97 . [5] The unusual pathological result test is stated in Hamilton v. Procon, Inc., supra, 434 Pa. at 94 , footnote 2. | 1 | 1971–1971 |
Hamilton v. Procon, Inc.
neutral
2 sentences1969The Superior Court affirmed per curiam, Judge Hoffman filing a dissenting opinion. 211 Pa. Superior Ct. 446, 236 A. 2d 819 (1967). 1969The Superior Court affirmed per curiam, Judge Hoffman filing a dissenting opinion. 211 Pa. Superior Ct. 446, 236 A. 2d 819 (1967). | 1 | 1969–1969 |
Gavula v. Sims Company.
green
2 sentences1969The Board found that the claimant failed to sustain his burden of proof that an accident occurred and failed in his burden of proof to bring his injury within the unusual pathological result doctrine as set forth in Gavula v. Sims Co., 155 Pa. Superior Ct. 206, 212 , 38 A. 2d 482 (1944). “. . . a compensable injury may occur, in the course of the normal duties of an employee and without overexertion, when a strain, sprain or twist causes a break or sudden change in the physical structure or tissues of the body — that is, a fracture of the bone or bony cartilage, or a rupture of the softer tiss 1969The Board found that the claimant failed to sustain his burden of proof that an accident occurred and failed in his burden of proof to bring his injury within the unusual pathological result doctrine as set forth in Gavula v. Sims Co., 155 Pa. Superior Ct. 206, 212 , 38 A. 2d 482 (1944). “. . . a compensable injury may occur, in the course of the normal duties of an employee and without overexertion, when a strain, sprain or twist causes a break or sudden change in the physical structure or tissues of the body — that is, a fracture of the bone or bony cartilage, or a rupture of the softer tiss | 1 | 1969–1969 |